Another week another hospital commander relieved

[Slevin]

http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/2015/04/08/lock-relieved-command-mcdonald/25427775/

I wonder who will be on the chopping block next

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Gastrapathy]

Your nurse SG will fire nurses too.

 

[HighPriest]

Oh, it's not about sides. It's about scapegoating.

 

[j4pac]

fingers crossed

 

[Homunculus]

how does someone get that many MSMs? i could see the number of MSM's and ARCOMs being reversed, but it looks to me like maybe she had a lot of fluff admin experience before and when the **** got real maybe wasn't up to the task. i've seen commanders sacked late before (one of my previous MEDDAC commanders was relieved just a couple of months before she was due to leave, anyway) but it makes me wonder why it took so long.

my personal suspicion is these "command climate" things that have probably been pencil whipped a lot before people are actually taking time to fill out accurately. one of our current hospital "goals" is to raise provider satisfaction to some ridiculous number-- like 90%. i think the repetitive sacking due to command climate issues is just a reflection on the system. imagine, if you will, if we were to fill out a command climate survey for our nurse surgeon general.

until it's fixed, this will continue. because as @HighPriest noted, it's about scapegoating. fixing the problem is too difficult, so just blame the leader and lather, rinse, repeat.

--your friendly neighborhood would settle for staff indifference instead of satisfaction caveman

 

[NavyFP]

how does someone get that many MSMs?

--your friendly neighborhood would settle for staff indifference instead of satisfaction caveman

Gotta remember that the Army gives out Bronze Stars and MSMs like candy to any officer O3 and above. (and not too picky E6-E9)

Navy fired 2 COs in the past couple of weeks. COs of Rota and USNS Comfort MTF both siting "command climate" issues.

I suspect the people (in general) who should be COs don't want to be COs or are turned down.

 

[tiredmildoc]

She was awful. A total quota case. Should have never been in Command. First hand knowledge.

 

[ArmyTiger]

I actually appreciate the willingness of the services to relieve commanders, especially based on command climate surveys. It tells me that these are one anonymous survey that is not immediately thrown in the garbage, and that trends in morale/complaints are actually tracked and addressed.

Command is a hard position to hold, but important. If a commander is not holding the confidence of their personnel, the reasons need to examined and a change in leadership may need to be made. We fire football coaches for the same reason, why not officers?

I see nothing in this story that suggests this a "scapegoating" issue.

On the other hand, I don't know that I've ever seen this on the line side of the house. Command survey is done, someone in an S3 or G3 shop makes a PowerPoint addressing the easiest problems to fix, and then nothing changes. No one gets fired, unless they do something like have their wife run the FRG like a military unit with herself as commander. This is a problem almost exclusive to AMEDD.

 

[HighPriest]

From my personal experience, anecdotal as it is, the biggest problems in the medical corps are OTSG directives. And so firing a hospital commander isn't addressing the issues that seem to result in the lowest morale/"command climate" problems. Ultimately it is either a coincidence that hospital commanders are being discarded all over the country for the exact same types of problems, or it is that the problems are actually flowing from a higher source. Additionally, it isn't hard to make the argument that someone is actually placing hordes of terrible commanders in charge of hospitals nation wide, which is also an upstream problem. So while this specific article doesn't look like scapegoating, taken in context I think there is a strong argument to be made.

 

[Slevin]

Well looks like the Marines aren't immune

http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/28914733/marine-corps-base-hawaii-commanding-officer-relieved

 

[DrMetal]

Well looks like the Marines aren't immune

http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/28914733/marine-corps-base-hawaii-commanding-officer-relieved

This is ridiculous. I sincerely hope no one is being fired simply per the results of some annonymous survey (i can understand the survey triggering an investigation, that leads to a hearing, and then a firing), but just the survey cant surely have this much bearing, right?!?

We have seriously lost our way as a military. Well, Im glad the 21st Century has yet to produce a world war.

 

[Gastrapathy]

But...it's also an opportunity for lazy entitled weebees to get rid of people who try to impose a little accountability.

 

[Gastrapathy]

Yeah, you'll miss that as a postresidency inhabitant of a MTF.

 

[DrMetal]

The results of a command climate survey may trigger an investigation, and that investigation can and does result in people being relieved of their command. There is no "hearing" because this is not a formal disciplinary action (NJP, court martial, etc). It is one commander losing confidence in their subordinate (another commander) and choosing to remove them.

Having known several people at the company level who were relieved, I can tell you it is not something any commander does lightly. It sets battalions back significantly to have to get new leadership.

I know it sounds ridiculous from the outside, but once you spend some time inside (especially in a difficult command situation), it makes a lot more sense. And the command climate survey is very much the only opportunity the low-ranking folks have the opportunity to "tell it like it is" to flag level officers without fear of retaliation.

I hope you're right, that there's some kind of a more formal process. Its a little weird though, here on the waterfront, the word is that there's a "no tolerance" policy with respect to bad command climate surveys. SURFPAC seems to have a lot of skippers on their chopping blocks, it's got everybody on edge.

Low-ranking folks have the opportunity to "tell it like it is"? Ok, so why do it anonymously? If you believe in what you're saying and you think you're right, come forth, reveal thyself, and tell it like it is. I'd give much more weight to an opinion if I knew who it was coming from, for instance a seasoned E-9, E-8 . . . hell even a motivated E-6. But it seems silly to launch an investigation because a gaggle of deck seamen don't like having to drill at 0600 in the morning and complain about it anonymously on some survey.

Again, we're a military, not a company. It's nice that we try to care about our "culture" and "climate"---don't get me wrong, I'm all for making everyone happy if possible---but if we can't achieve the "happy" solution, then so be it. Barring extremes (hazing, sexual assault etc), you should be able to suck it up and move forward. And most do, most seem to like it, as evidenced by droves of enlisted who re-enlist . . . so much so that the Navy has to create force reshaping programs to force them out.

 

[HighPriest]

Our command climate surveys (I just took two of them, one for the hospital and one for the company) are 80% "how does your company deal with EO/SHARP issues", 10% "command-specific issues" which in our case deal mostly with whether or not we feel like the command communicates effectively with us, and 10% "do you feel like your command supports you and are you happy with your job."

Frankly, I agree that the last part isn't really relevant, and I say that as someone who loves the work that I do but hates where I do it. It doesn't matter that much if I'm arbitrarily happy with my job. I mean, it matters, but it shouldn't have anything to do with whether or not a commander keeps his job. EO and SHARP issues are obviously hot-button. They always will be. If most of your company feels like they're being sexually harrassed and you aren't doing anything about it, then yeah you're gonna get canned.

The communication issues could be taken a number of ways. All of those sections have comment boxes where they ask you to elaborate. I would assume that detailed, relevant elaborations would mean more than just checking the "my command sucks" box, but obviously I don't review these things. I can certainly say that I said nothing in my CCS that I haven't said a thousand times to my chain of command, so anonymity isn't necessary. I can also understand why it's anonymous. Part of what they ask is whether or not your command supports you. If the answer to that is no, and it's because you fear reprisal for raising complaints, then you need an anonymous survey. People in my company have, in the past, been threatened with reprisal when they have raised what I felt were legitimate concerns about patient safety. It happens. It hasn't happened to me, but I have watched it happen first hand. So I get the anonymity.

I also get the idea that an entire company could rise up and devour their company commander just because they don't like doing PT at 0530. That is an act of consipracy to large that it should actually reflect positively on the commander's ability to build espirit de corps, but yeah it could happen. For what it's worth, on our surveys, they ask what your rank is. that's not optional. I have to imagine that a bunch of negative E-7 commentary means more than a bunch of E-1s.

Ultimately no one on this threat knows what the cut-off is above which they decide to remove someone from command. I still feel like the problem is above the company or hospital level, and that the CCSs are a tool for scapegoating, but that's just an opinion.

 

[ARMYDOCWIFE]

Command Climate surveys mean nothing and are not acted upon unless there is a SHARP issue or EO issue. If you believe command climate surveys are read or valued by the senior leaders of the AMEDD you are drinking the kool aid.

Tired is correct stating the "you dramatically underestimate the retaliation that occurs to junior personal". The AMEDD leadership retaliates against senior personnel, do think a young enlisted kid has a chance?

The chicken on the AMEDD crest is appropriate. There are so many that are afraid to stand up and do the right thing for their patients, their co-workers and the AMEDD. The AMEDD leaders know this and take advantage.

 

[Gastrapathy]

It's not the enlisted. It's the govies.